Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I notice Boston Scientific is putting the health care tax as a reason but then I also see this:

Shares of Boston Scientific were down $1.73 or 17 percent at $8.43 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Late Monday after the NYSE closed, the company reported third-quarter earnings that missed expectations and cut its full-year forecast.

My guess is not meeting earnings will not influence a companies long term viability at all and its all the tax.
___

This is another one that confuses me:

Stryker said last November that it would eliminate 5% of its global workforce as part of an effort to realize $100 million in annual productivity gains to offset the hit when the excise tax takes effect in 2013.

So are the cuts really do to this tax or is it perhaps another scapegoat?

If you notice, most of that list is in the same field.I would think the use of the word "massive" is misplaced.

Medical instruments are way over billed and have been for a very long time.
They are one of the culprits behind spiralling healthcare costs as hospitals MUST have supplies so the costs are just forwarded without concern to customers.